Draft Terms of Reference for the Environmental Assessment of Dominion Diamond Ekati Corporation s Jay Cardinal Project

Transcription

1 Draft Terms of Reference for the Environmental Assessment of Dominion Diamond Ekati Corporation s Jay Cardinal Project

2 Table of Contents 1. Introduction Overview Referral to Environmental Assessment Legal Context and the Terms of Reference Development Process Scope Considerations Scope of Development Scope of Assessment Geographic Scope Temporal Scope Other Scope of Assessment Considerations Terms of Reference Considerations Issues Prioritization Incorporation of Traditional Knowledge Assessing the Impacts of the Environment on the Development Use of Appropriate Media General Information Requirements Summary Materials Developer Developer s Assessment Boundaries Description of the Existing Environment Development Description Public Engagement Impact assessment steps and significance determination factors Impacts on the Biophysical Environment Key Lines of Inquiry Subjects of Note Biophysical Environmental Monitoring and Management Plans Impacts on the human environment Key Lines of Inquiry Subjects of Note Human environment monitoring and management plans Cumulative Effects Accidents and Malfunctions Alternative Means to Carrying Out the Project Closure and Reclamation Conclusion

3 1. Introduction 1.1 Overview This document outlines the information required for the environmental assessment of the Jay Cardinal Project (also referred to as the Project ), specifically the initial open pit mining and subsequent underground development by Dominion Diamond Ekati Corporation (DDEC or the developer ) of the Jay and Cardinal kimberlite pipes. The proposed Project is an extension project to the existing Ekati Mine and the development of these pipes will rely on the mining infrastructure located at the existing Misery site and will provide feed to the processing plant at the Ekati mine site. These facilities are within the Wek eezhii Settlement Area and the project is anticipated to provide an additional 10 to 20 years of mine life. This document is divided into the following sections: Section 1 Introduction, including the reasons for environmental assessment referral, the legal context, and the Terms of Reference development process; Section 2 Description of the scope of the development and the scope of the assessment, including minimum geographic and temporal boundaries for consideration of impacts 1 of the proposed development on valued components of the biophysical and human environments; Section 3 The Terms of Reference that will direct the production of a Developer s Assessment Report; and, Appendices (Appendix A: Scope of Development and Appendix B: Guidelines for Monitoring and Management Programs. The Terms of Reference will direct the developer to organize existing material, and conduct additional study and analysis as appropriate, in order to submit a stand-alone Developer s Assessment Report. That report will then be used to inform all interested parties concerning the proposed development during the analytical phase of the environmental assessment Referral to Environmental Assessment DDEC has applied to develop two open pit mines in order to extract the Jay and Cardinal kimberlite pipes, noting the possibility of further mining underground later in the mine life. The pipes are located within Lac du Sauvage in the southeastern portion of the Ekati mine block. The kimberlite would be processed at the existing Ekati processing plant, which is approximately 25 km north of the proposed Project site and approximately 150 km east of the community of Wekweéti. In October 2013 the Wek eezhii Land and Water Board received applications for a Type A Land Use Permit ( ) and a Type A Water Licence ( ) for the Jay Cardinal Project. A Project Description of the proposed development extension was submitted by the developer as part of its application. The Wek eezhii Land and Water Board initiated a preliminary screening 1 Any reference to impact(s), change(s), effect(s) and similar words in this document refers to projectedrelated deviations from baseline conditions for a valued component. 2 The role of the Developer s Assessment Report and associated next steps in the environmental assessment are identified in the Work Plan issued by the Review Board as a companion document to the Terms of Reference. 2

4 of the Jay Cardinal Project according to Section 124 of the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act (MVRMA). On, the Mackenzie Valley Land and Water Board referred the project application to under paragraph 125(1)(b) of the MVRMA. The Mackenzie Valley Land and Water Board referred the project to environmental assessment. Key areas identified where impacts may occur were:. The Review Board notified DDEC on, that the development had been referred to. 1.3 Legal Context and the Terms of Reference Development Process This environmental assessment is subject to the requirements of Part 5 of the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act (MVRMA). Section 3 of the Review Board s Environmental Impact Assessment Guidelines describes the environmental assessment process in detail. That document, as well as the Review Board s Rules of Procedure, other guidelines, reference bulletins, and relevant policies applicable to this assessment are available online ( or by contacting the Review Board staff. In accordance with Section 115 of the MVRMA, the Review Board must conduct an environmental assessment of the proposed development with regard for the protection of the environment from significant adverse impacts, and the protection of the social, cultural and economic well-being of Mackenzie Valley residents and communities. Subsection 114(c) of the MVRMA further requires the Review Board to ensure that concerns of the Aboriginal peoples and the general public are taken into account. Accordingly, the Review Board has developed these Terms of Reference based on an examination of information from the following sources: ; All information on the public registry in relation to the Jay Cardinal Project; ; ; ; : and, Review Board experience in the conduct of environmental assessment. 3

5 2. Scope Considerations 2.1 Scope of Development Under Subsection 117(1) of the MVRMA, the Review Board determines the scope of development for every environmental assessment it conducts. The scope of development consists of all the physical works and activities required for the Project to proceed. Appendix A outlines a minimum listing of project components for the scope of development for this environmental assessment. Within this document the term Jay Cardinal Project, Project, development, or all other related words collectively represent the project components, activities, or structures that are required to undertake the development of the Jay and Cardinal kimberlite pipes that have not been previously assessed as part of the NWT Diamond Project Report of the Environmental Assessment Panel dated June 1996 or the Report of Environmental Assessment on the Proposed Development of Sable, Pigeon, and Beartooth Kimberlite Pipes February Where this document refers to the Jay Cardinal site, that means the area covered by Ekati s mineral claims and mining leases at, adjacent to, or near Lac du Sauvage. In the Developer s Assessment Report (see Section 3.2.5) the developer is required to fully describe all required facilities and activities for the development, including any not listed in Appendix A. The new facilities, infrastructure, and activities proposed as part of the Ekati Diamond Mine extension must be described for all phases of the Project: construction, operation, and closure. Details on changes, if any, to existing facilities, infrastructure, or activities to accommodate the Project must also be provided. The Review Board may amend the scope of development at any time during the environmental assessment if the proposed development changes. 2.2 Scope of Assessment The scope of assessment defines which issues will be examined in the environmental assessment. The scope of assessment includes all potential impacts on valued components of the biophysical and human environment (for example, wildlife species or heritage resources) from the development, by itself and in combination with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future developments (see Section for details). To determine the scope of assessment, the Review Board considered the Jay Cardinal Project Description and the public registry documents from, and. The Review Board also hosted scoping sessions in. 2.3 Geographic Scope The geographic scope will include all areas that may be affected by activities within the Jay- Cardinal Project scope of development. The geographic scope for each valued component must be appropriate for the characteristics of the component, or the impact and nature of the impact source. For example, consideration of impacts on air should reflect the airshed, wind patterns and 4

6 mobility of airborne contaminants, while the habitat ranges of wildlife using the area may be relevant from a project specific and cumulative effects perspective. All of these areas together will be considered in the environmental assessment study area, which will be further defined by the developer in its Developer s Assessment Report (see Section 3.2.3). The developer will provide rationale for the spatial boundaries it selects for the assessment of potential mine-related impacts on each valued component. The minimum geographic scope will include the following areas: 1. The Ekati mine s mineral and surface leases and mining claims in the area of the Jay Cardinal site, sub-surface working, and reasonable impact footprint radius centered on the site; 2. The Jay Cardinal site access road connecting the site to the Misery Haul Road and the Jay- Cardinal site roads, as well as a reasonable impact footprint corridor, including any portions of watercourses that may be affected; 3. The Paul Lake watershed, the drainage area of Lac du Sauvage, the outflow from Lac du Sauvage to Lac de Gras, and to the point where reasonably foreseeable Project-related impacts cease to occur; 4. Any watershed into which discharge water will be released and downstream to the point where reasonable foreseeable Project-related impacts cease to occur, including those on water quality, fisheries, and the human environment; 5. Any underground aquifers leading to Lac du Gras from the Jay Cardinal mine; and, 6. The habitat of any potentially affected species, including species-at-risk and migratory species, possibly affected by the Project. The geographic scope of assessing impacts to the human environment includes the First Nations, Métis, and Inuit organizations in the communities of Gameti, Wekweeti, Behchoko (formerly Rae-Edzo), Yellowknife, Dettah, N idilo, and Lutsel K e, and the Wek eezhii Settlement Area as a whole and those residents in or making traditional use of any part of the environmental assessment study area. This also included the community of Kugluktuk, Nunavut. Together, these groups are described in this document as potentially-affected communities. In its response to Section the developer is required to define and provide rational for the specific spatial boundaries it used to examine the potential impacts on each of the valued components in its impact assessment. 2.4 Temporal Scope The developer will use temporal boundaries for this environmental assessment according to potential long-term impacts on valued components, rather than on a single generic timeline. In all cases, the temporal boundary may not end with the duration of the operating phase of the Jay Cardinal Project. For project-specific (that is, non-cumulative) impacts, the temporal scope will include all phases of the Jay Cardinal Project lifespan including construction, operation, closure and reclamation, and extends until no potentially significant adverse impacts are predicted. For cumulative impacts, the temporal scope includes the period of the effects of past, present and reasonably 5

7 foreseeable future projects that are predicted to combine with the impacts of the Jay Cardinal Project. The developer will place special focus on the consideration of time during the development when activities are particularly intense (such as during the initial construction phase) or when valued components are particularly sensitive to potential impacts (such as during wildlife migration periods, or spawning and incubation periods for fish, key harvesting periods, and annual cultural gatherings). The developer will also give special attention to appropriate temporal boundaries for considering any impacts that may require long-term monitoring and management after closure, such as mine water release into the environment (see Section for details on the subject). In its response to Section the developer is required to define and provide rationale for the specific spatial boundaries, it used to examine the potential impacts on each of the valued components in its impact assessment. 2.5 Other Scope of Assessment Considerations The scope of assessment set out in these Terms of Reference may be re-examined at any time by the Review Board if new information emerges. The scope of assessment will include an examination of cumulative effects. This will involve considering impacts from other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future developments or human activities that combine with the impacts of the Jay Cardinal Project to affect the same valued components. Such cumulative effects will be assessed at a spatial and temporal scale appropriate to the particular effect or valued component under consideration. For example, road traffic in the area that is not part of the Project is excluded from the scope of the development. However, where the impacts and continuing effects of past activities may combine with the potential impacts of the Project, they must be considered in the cumulative effects assessment (see Section for more detail). Section 3.1 indicates the level of effort required in considering specific issues. 6

8 3. Terms of Reference 3.1 Considerations The developer should consider the following when developing the specific material the Review Board requests in Sections 3.2 to 3.4 and related Appendices. The developer is encouraged to seek clarification from the Review Board in writing if specific requirements in the Terms of Reference are unclear. If the developer finds that an item cannot be addressed, the developer should provide a rationale Issues Prioritization The purpose of scoping is not only to identify issues, but also to prioritize them and if possible focus required additional work on the most important issues. DDEC will consider all the items described in Section 3.3 because every issue identified in this Terms of Reference requires serious consideration and substantive analysis to demonstrate whether the development is likely to be the cause of or contribute to a significant adverse impacts. Data collection and analyses for each discipline-specific assessment presented in the Developer s Assessment Report should be at a level of detail appropriate for other interested parties to understand the technical material prior to any technical sessions on these topics Incorporation of Traditional Knowledge The Review Board values and considers both traditional knowledge and scientific knowledge in its deliberation. In addition, subsection 115(c) of the MVRMA provides as a guiding principle for the Review Board the importance of conservation to the well-being and way of life of the Aboriginal peoples of Canada to whom Section 35 of the Constitution Act 1982, applies and who use an area of the Mackenzie Valley. DDEC will make all reasonable efforts to assist in the collection and consideration of traditional knowledge relevant to the Jay Cardinal Project. Where possible, DDEC will make all reasonable effort to incorporate traditional knowledge from Aboriginal culture holders as a tool to collect information on and evaluate the specific impacts required in this Terms of Reference. The developer should refer to the Review Board s Guidelines for Incorporating Traditional Knowledge into the Environmental Impact Assessment Process 3 and community/culture group-specific traditional knowledge protocols Assessing the Impacts of the Environment on the Development Potential impacts of the physical environment on the development, such as changes in permafrost regime, other climate change impacts, seasonal flooding and melt patterns, seismic events, geological instability, and extreme precipitation must be considered in each of the applicable items of this Terms of Reference. Any changes to the design or management of the Jay Cardinal 3 Available at pdf 7

9 Project as a result of considering potential impacts to the environment should be noted in the relevant sections Use of Appropriate Media The Review Board encourages the developer to present information in user-friendly ways. The use of maps, aerial photographs, development component/valued component interaction matrices, full explanation of figures and table, and an overall commitment to plain language is encouraged. When it is necessary to present complex or lengthy documentation to satisfy the requirement of the Terms of Reference, the developer should make every effort to simplify its response in the main body of the text and place supporting materials in appendices. DDEC will also produce all electronic documents in Adobe portable document format. The Developer s Assessment Report will be submitted as a stand-alone document. Relevant information and analyses from any previous project description should be incorporated into the Developer s Assessment Report and combined with the supplementary material and analyses required by this Terms of Reference. Further, any information referenced will be made accessible. 3.2 General Information Requirements The Final Terms of Reference document describes the general information required on a subjectby-subject basis. The developer is encouraged to consider the information gaps identified and questions raised by interested parties on the public record in scoping submissions and comments on the draft Terms of Reference when determining the level of detail required in its Developer s Assessment Report for specific issues covered in this Final Terms of Reference Summary Materials The following summary materials are required: 1. Plain language, non-technical summaries of the Developer s Assessment Report in English, Chipewyan,, Inuvialuktun, and Tlicho; 2. A concordance table that cross references the items in the Terms of Reference with relevant sections of the Developer s Assessment Report; and, 3. A commitments table listing all mitigation measures the developer will undertake, including but not limited to those described in the Project application. These should be organized by subject (e.g., water quality, wildlife) for ease of reference Developer The following information is required regarding DDEC as well as its subsidiary companies, related corporations and joint venture partners: 1. A summary of the corporate history and operational experience in Canada and the Northwest Territories; 2. How the developer will ensure that its contractors and subcontractors honour commitments made by DDEC; 3. Environmental performance records for DDEC and its partners during prior exploration and development work in support of the Jay Cardinal Project and any other projects in the 8

10 Northwest Territories. This will include discussion of regulatory compliance (for example, regarding land use permits and water licences); and, 4. A description of any corporate policies, codes of practice, programs or plans concerning DDEC s environmental, sustainable development, community engagement, and workplace health and safety commitments or policies Developer s Assessment Boundaries The developer will provide a description, map, and rationale for all of the chosen geographical and temporal boundaries used during its impact assessment. Certain minimum requirements and other instructions to assist in the determination of appropriate boundaries are discussed in Section 2.2 of the Terms of Reference. Separate boundaries may be required for cumulative effects assessment (see Section 3.3.3). The developer will describe and provide rational for: An overall environmental assessment study area and the rationale for its boundaries; DDEC s chosen spatial boundaries for the assessment of potential impacts for each of the valued components considered; and, The temporal boundaries chosen for the assessment of impacts on each valued component Description of the Existing Environment A detailed description of the existing environment is required, including current status and trends for all valued components. Wherever possible, the developer is responsible for providing a clear picture of what typical environmental conditions currently exist in the environmental assessment study area prior to the start of this environmental assessment. This will include relevant data collected as part of the existing monitoring programs at the Ekati site, including the Surveillance Network Program, the Aquatic Effects Monitoring Program and the Wildlife Effects Monitoring Program. The data presentation must consider baseline/background conditions, the natural variability of background conditions, and to the extent possible differentiate between natural background conditions, current environmental conditions, and effects from past development activities, such as exploration, the existing Ekati mine operation, or the existing Diavik mine operation. In addition, the developer must provide a description of the methods used to acquire the information used to describe baseline/background conditions. This description will distinguish between techniques used to measure parameters in the field from information derived from the utilization of models. DDEC will provide complete references for historical data and indicate how and when historical data were used as a basis for conclusion(s). The following description should be at a level of detail sufficient to allow for a thorough assessment of Project effects. Describe the biophysical environment within the relevant environmental assessment study areas: 9

11 Biophysical Environment 1. The physical location of the proposed development (with maps), including ecozone(s) and ecoregions(s); 2. Ambient air quality, including baseline concentrations of criteria air contaminants (total suspended particulates, particulate matter [PM 10, PM 2.5 ], nitrogen oxides, sulphur dioxide and carbon monoxide) including dioxins and furans; 3. Baseline ambient noise levels, differentiating between those associated with DDEC s current activities at the Project site, including exploration activities, and background noise. 4. Climatic conditions, including but not limited to climate trends and extremes in temperature, precipitation, and wind patterns; 5. Current and historical data on surface water and groundwater quality for the Jay Cardinal Project site, and downstream, including a reasonable neighbouring area of Lac de Gras. DDEC will include the overall range of natural variability of background conditions. DDEC will also include reference waterbodies in the analysis and a rational for their selection. While describing baseline conditions for water quality, DDEC will include but not be limited to reporting on the following parameters: o metals of concern (including but not limited to those commonly listed in Metal Mining Effluent Regulations [MMER] and Canadian Council of Ministers for the Environment [CCME] guidelines); o petroleum products, o ph, o salinity, o sulphate, o ammonia, o chloride, o nitrate, o phosphorus, o total suspended solids, o total dissolved solids, o dissolved oxygen, o turbidity, o nitrite, and, o any other commonly listed CCME MMER constituents; 6. Hydrology and hydrogeology, including surface water and groundwater amounts, directions of flow, likely surface points/discharge area (for groundwater), and maps and descriptions of associated watersheds, both in the local area of the Project site as well as downstream, including a reasonable neighbouring area of Lac de Gras. Discussion should focus in particular on: a. water quantity, with sufficient data to capture spatial and temporal variation. To this end provide watershed boundaries, including groundwater and surface drainage patterns, b. seasonal and annual variation in groundwater and surface water quantity, including trends over time and extreme events (e.g., high flows), c. the relative contribution of water from the Jay Cardinal site to the volume of the surrounding watershed and the downstream environment, d. surface water and groundwater flow regimes associated with the Jay Cardinal Project site, and, 10

12 e. relationship between the groundwater regime and permafrost and active layer conditions, including a characterization of those conditions, and how permafrost and active layer changes influence hydrogeology. 6. Aquatic habitat and aquatic organisms in the environmental assessment study area. Include water bodies on the site, and downstream to the extent of predicted impacts. Describe the following key aquatic species: a. fish bearing water bodies that the Project may affect, including downstream to the extent of potential impacts including a reasonable neighboring area of Lac de Gras; b. seasonal and life cycle movements; c. local and regional abundance and distribution; d. key riparian habitat, particularly for any proposed areas for water intake or outfall; e. known or suspected sensitive habitat areas for different development stages and times of year; f. the food chain that supports the species, and that the species supports; g. identification of key species that would serve as biological indicators for change before change reached higher trophic levels; and, h. any known issues currently affecting fish and other aquatic life forms in the area; 7. Describe any, and all, connectivity temporary or continuous between the various water bodies at the Jay-Cardinal Project site; 8. Wildlife (including resident and migratory bird species), wildlife habitat and migration corridors. Special emphasis will be placed on key harvested species including caribou and furbearers. Where available, the following information is required for each species: a. population trends, including abundance, distribution and demographic structures for the local population(s) with the potential to be impacted, b. habitat requirement, including identification of local areas of important habitat, attributes of the seasonal habitats that relate to how the species use them (e.g., travel routes, forage) and sensitive time periods, c. migration routes, patterns, and timing including typical patterns and the range of known variation, d. factors known or suspected to be currently affecting the species in the environmental assessment study area (e.g., harvesting, disease), e. known or suspected sensitivities to human activities, and, f. gaps in current knowledge of the species such as the impacts of disturbance on behaviour or abundance; 9. Wildlife at risk occurring in the environmental assessment study area. The developer will: a. identify any species present or potentially present in the environmental assessment study area that are listed under Schedule 1 of the federal Species at Risk Act (SARA), including but not limited to peregrine falcon, grizzly bear, and aquatic species, b. identify any species present or potentially present in the Project area assessed by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC), and, c. describe each species in terms of the requirements listed in item #10 above; 10. Vegetation and plant communities, including identification of any areas where rare plants are known or suspected to be present; 11. Terrain, surficial geology, structural geology, mineralogy, bedrock geology (type, depth, composition, and permeability), seismic activity records and risk factors, permafrost locations and types within the environmental assessment study area. In particular: 11

13 a. describe the structure, permeability, stability, and other relevant characteristics of the area, b. describe the permafrost conditions at the site, including thermal conditions and ground ice/moisture contents of underlying material, particularly if maintenance of frozen conditions is required, c. identify the chemical composition of host rock and kimberlite pipes at the site including potential for acid rock drainage; d. describe and map the ground composition underlying the proposed site, e. identify the location, amounts, and type of granular material deposits including information on ground ice, f. describe existing fractures and faults at the Project site, g. describe the ground conditions under and around the access road proposed, with emphasis on identifying areas susceptible to erosion, and permafrost instability, and, h. include maps, cross-section and figures to illustrate geological features, where appropriate; 12. Physical and chemical makeup of: a. soils, within a reasonable established radius around the site, and at reasonably established far-field points with the intention of establishing a baseline to track potential impacts from mine-related emissions, and, b. water body sediments in potentially affected water bodies (i.e., from direct or indirect [e.g., aerial] deposition), including baseline concentrations. Human Environment 13. Physical infrastructure present in the environmental assessment study area, including habitations, roads, buildings, quarries, power lines, and industrial works; 14. Available information pertaining to the Project area from land use planning in the region of potentially affected communities; 15. The availability and average training or skill levels of people in the region of potentially affected communities and other Aboriginal and Northern resident regional labour pool; 16. The local and regional business capacity available to support the Project; 17. Current socio-economic conditions and relevant trends in the potentially-affected communities and in the region of potentially affected communities as a whole, using appropriate indicators of well-being and quality of life; 18. Description of current community wellbeing including information about the capacity, availability, and affordability, where relevant, of local services and infrastructure (i.e., housing, training, education, day care services, health care, etc.). 19. A summary of historic and present land use in the study area, including identification of traditional land use groups, areas used, and traditional travel routes and timings. This summary will include a description of the current use of Lac du Sauvage for traditional, commercial, or recreational pursuits; 20. Traditional harvesting activities, relevant species (wildlife, fish and plants), observed trends, and any traditional values expressed about harvested species; 21. Changes in the traditional way of life and household function due to employment at the mine; 22. Description of impact on cultural and traditional values, traditional lifestyles, in affected communities; 12

14 23. Known physical heritage resource locations, areas of high potential for undiscovered physical heritage resources and cultural values associated with the environmental assessment study area; 24. Other current economic activities in the environmental assessment study area; and, 25. The number of full-time job equivalents and person years of work associated with the Jay- Cardinal Project, broken down by life cycle phase Development Description The Jay-Cardinal Project is an extension project to the existing Ekati Mine. DDEC will ensure that a description of all its planned facilities and activities is included in the Developer s Assessment Report, including any proposed new facilities or activities not listed in Section 2.1 of the Terms of Reference. Further, the developer will provide a description of all existing facilities that will be used as part of this project, specifically details of any modification required to accommodate the Project or refurbishing required to extend the life of the facilities. In this section, DDEC is only asked to provide details on the Jay Cardinal Project itself, not to comment on potential impacts from the development. For the purpose of an efficient and effective environmental assessment, the Review Board requires the developer to present the project description in its final configuration in the Developer s Assessment Report, or to apply this Terms of Reference to all alternatives under consideration. Overall, DDEC must describe the proposed Jay Cardinal Project, providing details of all works and activities throughout construction, operation, closure and reclamation, and long-term monitoring phases, with a description of major activities by phase. This level of description is required for all project components that are considered to be part of the proposed extension, including: New Infrastructure, Facilities, and Management Plans Proposed as Part of the Project 1. The estimated lifespan of the Jay Cardinal Project broken down into construction, operation, closure and reclamation, and long-term monitoring phases, with a description of major activities by phase; 2. The direct physical footprint of the Project, with locations and descriptions of all structures and all above-ground and underground infrastructure to be constructed; 3. A list of all regulatory permits, licences and other authorizations required to carry out the development; 4. Land tenure and any existing or anticipated agreements related to access to facilitate the proposed development; 5. A list of any other required development that needs to be constructed in order for the Project to proceed; 6. All open pit mining facilities required including: ramps, portals, declines, infrastructure (and the locations), machinery requirements, and water management facilities and methods; 7. All underground mining facilities including: ramps, ventilation system, underground infrastructure, and surface support infrastructure; 8. The mining, crushing, (if applicable) and kimberlite transportation methods used; 9. A description of the expected spatial volume of the mine; 10. Mine rock management areas including location, underlying ground conditions and volume of waste rock over the life of the mine; 13

15 11. The proposed new site access roads, including construction (width of right-of-way, road bed type) and maintenance schedule, required construction material, techniques to minimize erosion and bank instability and the expected number of trips on the road, water crossings, as well as the type and weight of loads, any related storage, transfer and handling, etc; 12. Estimated processed kimberlite volumes over the life-of-project, as well as supernatant volume; 13. A description of the proposed minewater management facilities, including storage capacity, operational life, distance to groundwater table, rock types, presence of faults, and any containment dams or dikes; 14. The total amount of water in cubic meters estimated to be collected from all water sources and eventually released into local watercourses, with consideration of changes during the life of the Jay Cardinal Project and the range of seasonal fluctuations; 15. A description of the construction material required for the entire life-of-project and the expected source(s); 16. A comprehensive water balance for the site, include a reference to total and available volumes of water sources, and description of the time of year the water will be withdrawn; 17. The types and estimated amounts of explosives to be used, their storage, handling and application; 18. The location, contents, and estimated amounts of mined material, soil, and overburden at all surface storage facilities, along with estimated storage requirements, storage capacity limits, separation of material, and maintenance of materials to facilitate reclamation; 19. Location(s) of proposed activities of aggregate production and storage, with an estimate of the amount of aggregate that will be produced per year over the life of the mine, by location; 20. Energy requirements and generation sources; 21. Fuel storage facilities including a justification for the fuel storage container type selected, on-site fuel transport and handling procedures; 22. All other infrastructure and activities, including intensity and type of on-site vehicle traffic required; and, 23. The number of full-time job equivalents and person years of work associated with the Jay Cardinal Project, broken down by life cycle phase. 24. Contracting and procurement information including, if known, a breakdown of the number and types of jobs that will be done by contractors. For previously assessed, existing, and approved facilities that are to be used as part of the Project, DDEC must provide a full description of the project component, how it will be used in the context of the proposed Project, and any changes to the existing infrastructure or facilities that will occur as a result of the proposed development. Existing Infrastructure, Facilities, and Management Plans Potential Relevant to the Proposed Extension Project 25. Operation of the airstrip, frequency of use, type of aircraft, and estimated number of passengers and volume of material; 26. Operation of the kimberlite processing plant, including any required modifications or refurbishing to accommodate the Project; 27. A description of the relevant processed kimberlite management facilities; 28. A description of the relevant mine water management existing facilities; 14

16 29. Water intake locations, withdrawal methods, and estimated amounts of water required for all water sources for all on-site activities; 30. A description of waste disposal facilities (including landfills, landfarms, oil treatment facilities, incineration facilities, other temporary waste management facilities) and management of all waste generated including storage and disposal plans; 31. A description of the type, volume, storage (location and method), handling, transport and disposal of all waste, as well as fuel, reagents and hazardous materials used on-site; 32. The storage location of processing reagents, including maximum volumes and concentrations to be stored on-site; 33. The water collection, management, and treatment systems and all their component parts and reagents, including drainage and other control structures, water and sewage treatment facilities, water storage facilities, and water transport components; 34. Worker transportation, especially those who live in communities without direct air transportation from their community and proposed work scheduling; and, 35. Workforce requirements to accommodate the Project Public Engagement Engagement with potentially-affected communities (i.e., Ekati Mine IBA groups), governments, and the Independent Environmental Monitoring Agency should be considered in this section. Aboriginal groups, government agencies, and other interested parties may have information useful to the conduct of this impact assessment and all reasonable efforts should be made to engage with them. The Review Board encourages the developer to continue to meet with these groups outside the environmental assessment process, and to place any information from those discussions they consider may be relevant to the Review Board s decision on the public record. The following items are required for consideration of public engagement: An updated engagement log describing dates, individuals, and organizations engaged with, the mode of communication, discussion topics, and positions taken by participants, including: All commitments and agreements made in response to issues raised by the public and Aboriginal groups during these discussions, and how these commitments altered the planning of the proposed Jay Cardinal Project, and, All issues that remain unresolved, documenting any further efforts envisioned by the parties to resolve them; Description of all methods used to identify, inform, and solicit input from potentiallyinterested parties, and any plans DDEC has to keep engagement moving forward; Discussion of the implications for environmental monitoring and management of any relevant agreement between the developer and other interested parties; and, How DDEC has engaged or intends to engage, traditional knowledge holders in order to collect relevant information for establishing baseline conditions and assessing the effects of potential impacts, as well as a summary table indicating where and how in subsequent sections (3.3 to 3.7) traditional knowledge was incorporated, and who was consulted (see Review Board s Guidelines for incorporating Traditional Knowledge in Environmental Impact Assessment). 15

17 3.3 Impact assessment steps and significance determination factors In order to facilitate the consideration of the specific questions posed in this section, the developer is required to address the following impact assessment steps. In assessing impacts on the biophysical environment, the Developer s Assessment Report will for each subsection: Identify any valued components used and how they were determined; Identify the natural range of background conditions (where historic data are available), and current baseline conditions, and analyze for discernible trends over time in each valued component, where appropriate, in light of the natural or existing variability for each; Identify any potential direct and indirect impacts on the valued components that may occur as a result of the proposed development, identifying all analytical assumptions; Predict the likelihood of each impact occurring after mitigation measures are implemented, providing a rationale for the confidence held in the prediction. The developer must also present the predictions in a manner that facilitates the formulation of testable questions for future follow-up programs, as well as textually and schematically indicate the pathways of predicted impacts; Compare the predicted impacts to pre-development conditions. Include a description of any plans, strategies or commitments to avoid, reduce or otherwise manage and mitigate the identified potential adverse impacts, with consideration of best management practices in relation to the valued component or development component in question; Describe techniques such as models utilized in impact prediction including techniques used where any uncertainty in impact prediction was identified; Identify, and provide an opinion on the significance of any residual adverse impacts predicted to remain after any mitigation measures and indicate the methodologies for reaching such conclusions; and, Identify any monitoring, evaluation, and adaptive management plans required to detect potential unexpected changes as well as to ensure that predictions are accurate, and if not, to proactively manage against developing adverse impacts when they (or unexpected changes) are encountered. The developer will describe how the predicted impacts are expected to arise from the proposed development. This will include describing the mechanisms for cause and effect and providing supporting references (including where Traditional Knowledge was used). Where professional judgement has been used in determining impacts, this must be made clear. DDEC will also provide a discussion on the uncertainty involved with each prediction. For each predicted impact, the developer will also describe: the nature or type of the impact; the geographical range of the impact; the timing of the impact (including duration, frequency and extent); the magnitude of the impact (what degree of change is expected); the reversibility of the impact; and, the likelihood and certainty of the impact. The above will be used by the developer as a basis for its justification of significance for potential impacts from this Project. The Review Board will make ultimate determinations of 16

18 significance after considering all the evidence on the public record later in the environmental assessment. For more information on the above required descriptions refer to Section 3.11 of the Review Board s Environmental Impact Assessment Guidelines available on the Review Board s public registry Impacts on the Biophysical Environment DDEC proposes to develop the Jay and Cardinal kimberlite pipes as an extension to the existing Ekati Mine, this Project will used the existing mining infrastructure present at the Misery site. The development entails two open pit mines within Lac du Sauvage in an area where water will be diverted and lake levels will be drawn down. Also proposed is the bypassing of the flows of water that report to the drainage area of Lac du Sauvage around the dewatered area through Paul Lake and eventually back into Lac de Gras. This water management system and any potential impact(s) that may result deserve a thorough analysis in this environmental assessment. Further, although, the Project has been laid out in a manner to minimize the physical footprint, to the extent feasible, to avoid sensitive areas and valued resource areas, and will be conducted in accordance with existing site heritage resource and species-at-risk management strategies; concerns have been raised regarding the proximity of the development to the Lac du Sauvage outlet into Lac de Gras. This area and along the esker to the west side of Lac du Sauvage are known to be important traditional use, cultural, and caribou movement sites. In addition to these project-specific concerns, DDEC proposes, in accordance with existing activities at site, to store waste rock on surface; to exploit local aggregate sources; to construct site access roads, and, site support infrastructure such as roads, cause ways, laydown areas, and power line Key Lines of Inquiry Key Lines of Inquiry are areas of the concern that have been identified as requiring the most attention during the environmental impact review and the most rigorous analysis and detail in the Developer s Assessment Report. Key Lines of Inquiry are identified to ensure a comprehensive, detailed analysis of the issues that were identified as bringing about potential significant public concern regarding the proposed development. The developer will provide a standalone assessment to facilitate public evaluation for all identified Key Lines of Inquiry. Assessment work will encompass project-specific effects, potential additive effects considering potential accidents and malfunctions, and potential cumulative effects. Three Key Lines of Inquiry pertaining to the biophysical environment were identified for the Ekati Mine extension: Key Line of Inquiry 1: Impacts to Water Quantity Key Line of Inquiry 2: Impacts to Water Quality; and Key Line of Inquiry 3; Impacts to Caribou. 17

19 KLI-1 Impacts to water quantity from project components For the locally impacted watershed and downstream water bodies (the extent of potential impacts and including a reasonable neighboring area within Lac de Gras) DDEC must provide a comparison of predicted water quantities to baseline conditions and describe the impacts to surface water and groundwater from the following sources, both in isolation and collectively: the diversion of water around the dewatered portion of Lac du Sauvage; the management of drawdown water from Lac du Sauvage; the management of mine water from the open pits; accidents and malfunctions; and, the predicted long-term effect(s). KLI-2 Impacts to water quality from project components For the locally impacted watershed(s) and downstream water bodies (the extent of potential impacts and a reasonable neighboring area) DDEC must provide a comparison of predicted contaminant levels to baseline conditions and relevant water quality guidelines and describe the impact to water quality from the following sources, both in isolation and collectively: construction activities including lake drawdown and water diversion the mine water release to the receiving environment; operational water diversions and water management activities; the waste rock management area runoff; the aggregate management area runoff; accidents and malfunctions; and, the predicted long-term effect(s). KLI-3 Impacts to caribou from project components All required assessment information, should be provide in the context of baseline conditions and for all relevant life stages. Further, the predicted project-related long-term effect(s) to potentially impacted populations(s) should be discussed. DDEC must describe the impacts to local caribou population(s) from the following Project sources, both in isolation and collectively: For the locally impacted caribou population(s) DDEC must identify potential sources for increased caribou mortality, including any potential change to the predator-prey relationship of any potentially affected population. DDEC must describe the direct physical loss of available habitat as a result of proposed project activities. Further, DDEC must quantify the non-direct disturbance effects to available habitat through lowered habitat suitability due to the following: o fugitive dust and air emissions; o site water release, water management, dewatering, and diversion; o noise pollution, o light pollution, 18